strategy-review
Use when reviewing, critiquing, or stress-testing an existing strategy document. Evaluates seven dimensions — diagnosis quality, guiding policy strength, action coherence, assumption exposure, falsifiability — with optional 7S, Five Forces, Balanced Scorecard, and Hoshin Kanri lenses. Triggers on: review my strategy, poke holes in this plan, what's weak here, strategy audit, red team this. Does NOT build strategy (use strategy-interview) or brainstorm project ideas (use brainstorm-beagle).
Install via CLI (Recommended)
clawhub install openclaw/skills/skills/anderskev/strategy-reviewStrategy Review
Pressure-test strategy documents to find where they'll break before reality does it for you. The primary job isn't to evaluate prose quality or check formatting — it's to find the gaps, hidden failure paths, and under-accounted risks that will kill the strategy in execution. A strategy that survives this review has a meaningfully better chance of surviving contact with the real world.
This skill complements the beagle-analysis:strategy-interview skill. Strategy-interview helps build a strategy through guided conversation; strategy-review subjects an existing strategy to rigorous adversarial evaluation using the same kernel framework (diagnosis, guiding policy, coherent actions) and bad-strategy filter.
What makes this different from generic feedback
Most strategy feedback falls into two useless categories: vague praise ("this is really thoughtful") or surface-level nitpicking ("consider adding a timeline"). Neither helps the author see whether their thinking actually holds up under stress.
This review does three things that generic feedback doesn't:
- Tests structural integrity — whether the logical chain from diagnosis through guiding policy to coherent actions actually holds together, or whether the "therefore" between them is secretly an "and also."
- Hunts for failure paths — not just what's wrong with the document, but what goes wrong in the real world because of what's missing. The slow drift scenario, the capability gap that stalls the load-bearing action, the competitor response nobody modeled, the political resistance the strategy pretends doesn't exist.
- Surfaces invisible assumptions — every strategy is a bet, but most strategies don't name their bets. This review finds the load-bearing assumptions the author hasn't stated and maps the risk of each one being wrong.
Before you start
Read references/review-dimensions.md — it contains the seven evaluation dimensions and their criteria. This is the backbone of the review. Keep it in working memory throughout.
Hard gates (evidence-bound)
These steps are easy to rationalize without evidence; each gate has a pass condition before you advance.
Metadata
Not sure this is the right skill?
Describe what you want to build — we'll match you to the best skill from 16,000+ options.
Find the right skillPaste this into your clawhub.json to enable this plugin.
{
"plugins": {
"official-anderskev-strategy-review": {
"enabled": true,
"auto_update": true
}
}
}Related Skills
tutorial-docs
Tutorial patterns for documentation - learning-oriented guides that teach through guided doing
fetch-pr-feedback
Fetch review comments from a PR and evaluate with receive-feedback skill
swift-testing-code-review
Reviews Swift Testing code for proper use of
rust-testing-code-review
Reviews Rust test code for unit test patterns, integration test structure, async testing, mocking approaches, and property-based testing. Covers Rust 2024 edition changes including async fn in traits for mocks,
explanation-docs
Explanation documentation patterns for understanding-oriented content - conceptual guides that explain why things work the way they do